For those that have been following these cases the developments yesterday are really interesting.
On 08/25/10 we learned that Brian Oxman on behalf of Joe Jackson re-filed their civil wrongful death lawsuit against Dr. Conrad Murray but also mentioned Dr. Arnold Klein in the suit.
On 09/15/10 we find that Dr. Murray's legal team has asked for Joe Jackson's civil wrongful death suit to be dismissed and added that Dr. Arnold Klein should have been included in Joe Jackson wrongful death civil suit. TMZ does have footage of Michael leaving Dr. Klein's office clearly impaired. There have also been reports from fans that they were very concerned about this and contacted Michael's "inner circle" asking that something be done.
You might remember that Joe Jackson and Brian Oxman took heat for including Katherine Jackson and Michael's children in his suit. Statements were made in the tabloid press about Katherine wanting nothing to do with this. Mainstream media still remains silent on court proceedings that involve Joe Jackson and Brian Oxman. The lack of mainstream media coverage still is a red flag to me. Where are their investigative reporters?
Also on 09/15/10 we learn that Katherine Jackson and Michael's children have filed a civil suit against: Dr. Murray, AEG and Kenny Ortega. The statements made are very similar to the statements made in Joe Jackson's wrongful death suit.
For those currently reading Leonard Rowe's book on his experiences with AEG, the fact that they are included in no surprise. What is interesting is that both of these wrongful death civil suits are active at the same time. Note: This is a different attorney than the one quoted in the "Don't Drag Me Into This" article.
Originally posted Jun 25th 2010 5:30 AM PDT by TMZ Staff
TMZ has obtained Joe Jackson's wrongful death lawsuit against Dr. Conrad Murray that Joe's lawyer, Brian Oxman, will file today -- Joe asks for unspecified damages in connection with the death of Michael Jackson. And, the lawsuit lists Katherine Jackson and Michael's three kids as "nominal" plaintiffs.
The lawsuit does not name AEG, though Oxman has alleged the company that produced "This Is It" was at least partly responsible for Jackson's death.
Oxman does not explain what he means when he lists Katherine and MJ's kids as "nominal" plaintiffs. He clearly does not have authority to sue on behalf of the children.
According to the suit, "Mr. Jackson believes there are other parties responsible for Michael Jackson's death but has not yet gathered sufficient information regarding their potential liability or responsibility." The suit says the complaint will be amended when sufficient info is gathered.
TMZ obtained a copy of the complaint, which will be filed in federal court this morning. In the complaint, Joe alleges Dr. Murray withheld vital information from the doctors and EMTs who were trying to save Jackson's life -- information that he had administered Propofol.
The complaint -- much like the intent to sue document TMZ first broke -- states that Murray tried to "clean-up the scene" before EMTs arrived.
Something new ... Murray told cops he was monitoring Michael when he gave him Propofol with a pulse oximeter, which measures the level of oxygen in a patient's blood. But according to the suit, when police searched the scene, they found the oximeter "in the closet in the next room."
The complaint alleges Dr. Murray felt he could change his story -- from Jackson had no drug problem, to Jackson was addicted to Propofol -- because he kept no medical records, as required by California law.
The complaint alleges Joe Jackson has suffered more than $75,000 in damages, the minimum amount required to get jurisdiction in federal court. The case was filed in federal -- not California court -- because Dr. Murray's residence is outside the state.
Interestingly, Oxman does not allege in the lawsuit -- like he did in the notice to sue -- that Dr. Murray was at a strip club, drinking, hours before Jackson died.
The complaint says Jackson had a week pulse while he was being worked on at UCLA. The strong intimation -- had Dr. Murray told UCLA doctors that Propofol was a factor, they could have taken steps to save Jackson's life.
And something else that's interesting. It was widely reported that Joe Jackson introduced Michael to Dr. Murray in Las Vegas, after Jackson needed a doctor for his children in 2006. But in the lawsuit, it says, "Defendants Murray, Acres Home (Murray's clinic in Houston) and Global (Murray's clinic in Nevada) solicited Michael Jackson to take care of his individual health needs."
And this sidenote -- When Jackson was taken to the UCLA Medical Center on June 25, he was admitted under the alias, Soule Shaun.
Joe Jackson -- Dr. Murray Held MJ Drug Intervention
8/25/2010 8:40 AM PDT by TMZ Staff
Joe Jackson has re-filed his wrongful death lawsuit against Dr. Conrad Murray -- and now claims Dr. Murray and AEG staged an intervention with Michael Jackson one week before he died.
According to the new documents, Dr. Murray and representatives from AEG went to Michael Jackson's home on N. Carolwood Drive on June 18, 2009 -- and said they were there for a "drug intervention."
The suit claims during the meeting AEG demanded Michael "stop seeing Dr. Arnold Klein and stop taking the drugs Klein gave to him." They wanted Michael to "take only the medications being given to him by Conrad Murray."
According to the suit ... the intervention was intended to get Michael to adhere to Dr. Murray's drug regimen so he could get more sleep. AEG thought Michael was missing rehearsals because of medications from Dr. Klein and other doctors.
The suit also alleges that in the days leading up to Michael's death it was apparent he was getting weaker and weaker, at times seeming "drugged and disoriented."
The upshot of the lawsuit -- the intervention and general concern over MJ's drug use is proof Dr. Murray had no business administering Propofol and other drugs to the singer and that Dr. Murray knew he was playing with fire.
Dr. Murray legal team wants Dr. Arnold Klein included
Dr. Conrad Murrayis going afterMichael Jackson's longtime physician and friend,Dr. Arnold Klein, claiming Klein is at least partly to blame for the singer's death and should be a defendant in Joe Jackson's wrongful death lawsuit.
In legal papers filed today and obtained by TMZ ... Dr. MurraychallengesJoe Jackson's decision not to name Dr. Klein as one of the physicians allegedly responsible for his son's death.
In the new docs, Murray quotes fromJoe's lawsuit, "Dr. Klein may have been medicatingMichaelJacksonup until or even beyond June 18, 2009, less than one week before Michael Jackson's death."
And Murray continues quoting fromJoe's lawsuitthat Dr. Klein "prescribed or may have over medicated Michael Jackson including to such point that AEG Live, LLC had to hire Dr. Murray in order to separate Michael Jackson from Arnold Klein."
And Murray goes on to quoteJoe's lawsuitwhich claims "AEG Live, LLC read Michael Jackson the proverbial 'riot act' to get him to stop subjecting himself to overmedication by Dr. Arnold Klein."
So with all that, Dr. Murray concludes, "The plaintiff [Joe Jackson] does not explain why, given these allegations, Dr. Arnold Klein is not a required party to be added to accord proper relief."
In other words ... why didn't Joe sue Arnie?
As TMZ first reported,Dr. Klein shot Michaelfull of Demerol -- 51 injections in a 3-month span, right up until the week of his death.
Dr. Murray also points the finger at other doctors who treated Michael Jackson, citing TMZ stories revealing that 7 doctors other than Murray were fueling MJ with meds at or near the time of his death.
Murray's team also asked the court to dismiss Joe's wrongful death lawsuit -- claiming Jackson doesn't have the right to file because he's not a beneficiary of MJ's estate.
In the suit, Katherine claims AEG's contract with Michael "created a legal duty for AEG to act reasonably toward the physical well-being of Michael Jackson."
In the document, Katherine also blames AEG for hiring Dr. Murray without a proper background check -- claiming, "AEG did not provide a doctor who was truly looking out for Jackson's well-being and did not provide equipment."
The suit also alleges AEG caused emotional distress to Michael's son Prince because he witnessed Michael suffering and dying, and "he was put in a position as bystander to these tragicevents."
Kenny Ortega, who produced the planned London concerts for Michael, is also named as a defendant.
The attorney who filed the suit,Brian J. Panish, released a statement saying, "The purpose of this lawsuit is to prove to the world the truth about what happened to Michael Jackson, once and for all."
AEG fires back against Katherine Jackson's lawsuit
AP – FILE - In this June 14, 2010 photo, Michael Jackson's parents, Katherine Jackson and Joe Jackson leave …
– Thu Sep 16, 6:49 pm ET
LOS ANGELES – A lawyer for the entertainment company sued by Michael Jackson's mother challenged the lawsuit Thursday and distanced AEG Live from the doctor charged in the singer's death.
"The lawsuit is inaccurate, unsubstantiated and meritless," attorney Marvin S. Putnam said in a statement released by AEG Live LLC.
Katherine Jackson sued AEG Live on Wednesday, claiming the promoter of her son's planned series of comeback concerts failed to provide key lifesaving equipment and adequately monitor the cardiologist hired to care for her son as he prepared for the shows.
She is seeking unspecified damages on behalf of herself and her son's three children.
Putnam's statement claimed the doctor, Conrad Murray, was acting as Jackson's personal physician and was not an AEG employee.
"Dr. Murray was Mr. Jackson's longtime personal physician," the statement said. "AEG did not choose him, hire him or supervise him."
Putnam said there would be no further public comments on the lawsuit.
Murray has pleaded not guilty to involuntary manslaughter in the death of Jackson in June 2009. Police said Murray gave Jackson an overdose of the anesthetic propofol.
Some interesting claims in reference to Dr. Klein here. (But he has incited some doubts about himself ever since this ordeal began.)
And I am glad to see AEG being brought into accountability. Kenny Ortega is an unexpected twist. Interesting...
By the looks of it there are now three camps all pointing the finger at various participants who played a part in this situation and who are in some form represented in each others claims. Looks like Murray's camp is intent on taking Dr. Klein along for the ride. Katherine is going specifically after the organization and persons behind the whole debacle.
The story is certainly developing and taking shape...
Thank You Bonnie for keeping us up to date.
Last Edited by on Sep 16, 2010 11:24 AM
Thanks you for the update and added information Bonnie,
I noted the omission of the drugstores where Michael had his prescriptions filled and the pharmaceutical companies. They should be added to the law suits filed by Joe, Katherine, and Michael's children. The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, and the FBI, along with other agencies were alleged to have found the pharmacies and pharmaceutical companies negligent in their prescription filling and labeling. One of the pharmacies that are considered negligent is established and located in the same building as Arnold Klein’s dermatology practice. What does that tell us?
They could add these companies to the lawsuits with the paragraph heading simply "GREED."
In reading Joe Jackson's law suit it seemed to me as though the case had enough information and facts to convict Murray on 2nd degree murder. Not in Joe's law suit but in the original court case. Don't you think?
Have a great day everyone and lot of L.O.V.E. sent your way.
I called CNN today after a report about Katherine filing suit was laughed at by a panel of idiots that clearly knew nothing about any of this.
There was a CNN legal advisor on there named Jennifer Smetters. She was literally laughing at the whole thing. It was disgusting and I could not help it. I had to call and speak my mind about how the media had NOT done their job to investigate this entire ordeal or NO ONE would be laughing.
Also, defense attorney Joey Jackson was laughing it off as well!
I worked in a profession where I had to monitor nightly news for my clients to see if the news was getting the story out there and getting it right. These pundits and network advisors and consultants DO NOT know what they are talking about most of the time and have NO SHAME in getting on the news and speaking lies or about things they know nothing about - without any shame.
CNN phone # (877) 835-5456
Sorry - I speak with anger every time I have commented the past few times. I just read these things and get so mad.
No one in the news had a problem covering stories of Michael DAY AND NIGHT to trash him. Why the heck can't they investigate the huge story about what really happened to him?
I have made calls for Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson to DO SOMETHING as well - but, have gotten no where with that to date.
One other thing - I called and spoke with someone from AEG. I have to tell you . . . they are REALLY REALLY worried about the number of fans and the action that we can stir up. They no we could be a force to be reckoned with and I hope that we will be!!
OK - thanks for listening to my ranting rage again.
Thank you for the information and for fighting back for the benefit of Michael's kids, family, and all of us. I would call the number you provided and complain, but I'm sorry to say that I'm not sure what to say as I did not see the report.
The media is definitely trying to make the Jacksons look foolish. Putting reports about a break-up and bickering between Joe and Katherine. Negative stories about the kids home and school life. Stories about how crazy the fans are, especially at Murrays court hearings. There are still tons of negitive stories being made up about Michael (stories like he is gay, etc). The media is very good at reporting half-truths and I noticed many times it is not so much "what" they report, as "how" the reporters report it. I may be telling my age by stating that when I was younger most reporters had integrity, but not anymore. Laughing at an attempt by Katherine at justice for Michael would be right up there (lets destroy Michael Jackson's reputation) ally.
If it is any consolation Sunflower, most people these days know the level of propaganda in the news. When I did watch the news I just wanted to reach in the TV and strangle the reporters reporting about Michael most of the time. I support you with love and good vibes.
Hang in there. Better days are coming.
I have been looking at the website: http://www.mjfanclub.net/home/index.php They have a section in their "In Loving Memmory" section (at the top of the page) called "Tribute projects." They also have a "Fan Dedication" section.
This website gave me the idea to plant a tree from all of us (on the Bonnie Vent message board) and dedicate it to Micheal with a sign saying just that. I'm from St Paul, MN. I don't see anything done like that here.
Thanks again Sunflower for your continued support and your willingness to get involved.
Thanks for the words of support. I am proud to stand up for Michael and his family and be associated with the MJ family of fans!
The more we do - the more credible this becomes for justice for Michael.
I have had many that came to me in the beginning and told me to "turn the other cheek" that Michael does not care about any of this anymore. I was SO glad to be led to Bonnie and this group. I believe in "turning the other cheek" and in forgiveness. But, in this case - I will never quit protecting Michael's name, honor, or legacy and I will do whatever I can to help get to the truth.
I have continued to speak up and now on my site - I have seen people begin to speak up as well. I have seen a ton of people begin to get involved that had told me before "it did not matter".
I can't speak for this site because I know Bonnie has been in lock down. But, as far as my own site - we have seen an increase in people joining and and getting active. I am so happy to see that all of us keep talking and keep standing up for Michael and it is making an impact on people - even if in some cases it is one person at a time.
I do not let ONE day go by that I don't turn around someone's negative opinion about Michael. NOT ONE. My family and friends know that when they go out to eat or to the movies or anywhere with me . . . I WILL be striking up a few conversations about Michael with complete strangers!! Even when I take my grandbabies to the park or to McDonald's play area . . . there are always other mothers or grandmothers to talk with.
The other day . . . after I had told Michael I was itching to call Jehovah Witness and tell them WHAT THEY MISSED OUT ON in having him as a member - I then told him I would not do it. But, then I woke up the next day and had to fight back calling them again and told Michael I would be respectful and not do it AS MUCH AS I WANTED TO DO SO! Then before the day was up - I was working on my computer for work and I looked up the JW phone # but, told Michael I would not disrespect him and do this but, it sure was not easy for me.
Then I heard someone walking up my front steps to my front door and I had this VERY STRONG WAVE of feelings that had me in a thick fog come over me and when the doorbell rang - I jumped up KNOWING before I opened my door - that it was Jehovah Witness missionaries on the other side of my door. AND, IT WAS!!!
I have lived here for 9-years and have NEVER had any Jehovah Witness at my door. NOT ONCE!
I opened the door and they told me who they were and I said, "I know because I am very close to Michael Jackson". Those poor ladies. Those poor poor ladies. They came to give testimony to me - but, they got testimony FROM me.
When I came back into my office to get back to work . .. I felt Michael smiling at me. lol (REALLY)
You have a very strong spirit and are really in tune with the needs of Michael. I had him visit me in a dream not too long after he passed and I woke up with the most loving happy feeling. I have never felt like that ever. It was amazing.
The bottom line here is that not one person and not one single company associated with Michael Jackson in terms of his health, his career, his business dealings or his general well being is willing to accept any responsibility for any negligence on their part, nor are any of these people and companies willing to admit to greed and having their own personal agendas.
This constant bombardment of new and conflicting information ultimately serves only one purpose, in my personal opinion: Confusion.
I hold Michael responsible for himself, his business dealings, his health, his well being, his career, etc, but I also hold accountable those people around him whom I firmly suspect used him, lied to him, deceived him, pressured him and manipulated him. There's plenty of responsibility to go around, and not one single person is willing to accept it. NOT ONE.
Murray, as I have long believed and foreseen, is not going to go down without a bitter fight and not without dragging any and all other associated parties with him. Klein, who was given quite the career advancement recently, is now being dragged into this, which he should have been from the very beginning, in my book. And all of a sudden, Murray wants all the other doctors who tended to Michael to be summoned to court and be sued as well? These are the very same doctors whose professional behavior and ethics were apparently considered acceptable enough to have their actions quickly and quietly swept under the table.
Hmmmm. . .
I plan on taking January 4, 2011 off from work to cover the court date down town regarding Murray, but I'm going to hold off on making any definite plans as I have a sneaking suspicion that date may get moved, or there will be other interesting dates around it involving various parties suing other various parties. Just another 3-ring circus.
AEG refuses to accept responsibility for hiring Murray. So, they are contradicting Katherine and Joe in their position. AEG also refused to allow Katherine and her attorneys the right to view Michael's contract last year in July or August, unless she agreed - in writing - to not sue them or take any legal action against them, or to discuss the contents of their contract and legal agreement with Michael. Katherine refused.
Thx for your post. I agree with what you've pointed out, including the "3-ring circus".
I was unaware of what you covered in the last paragraph, and sickened, but not surprised to hear that they've now stooped to blackmailing Michael's mother. That bt itself solidifies their guilt, let alone everything else. Where did you read/hear that piece of info? Just curious...
Nice post Carman. You hit the proverbial nail on the head.
I don't think any of Michael's inner circle is innocent.
Although I do believe AEG and others are guilty, there is one aspect of Leonard Rowe's book that kind of bothered me. The mention of giving Katherine 1 Million dollars to get Michael to cooperate with Rowe's Business interest, then upping it to 2 Million to clinch the deal. Even Rowe in Michael's long time inner circle was not above manipulating Michael with an offer he knew Michael couldn't refuse. Michael loved his mother above all else and I think Rowe was pretty shrewd in including her is the money end of the business deal. He knew Michael was very emotional concerning his mother. I wonder what Rowe’s cut was. I don't believe for one minute that Rowe was not out for numero-uno above the welfare of Michael. Rowe was a business man. Michael truly could not trust anyone. But he did trust. That was his downfall.
I also think that Murray wanting to include Kline is more of a legal move than an emotional outcry for justice, as Murray will have a better chance of clearing himself if Kline is involved in the misuse of drugs, and in the misconduct end of the trial. Murray including Kline will also put another face out there to take the heat and take some of the pressure off of him.
Murray is not making a move without the ok of his legal team.
Katherine was not black mailed. She was basically told, from what I gather from the article, that she would not be allowed to see the original contract signed between Michael and AEG unless she agreed to sign a confidentiality agreement and promised not to attempt to take any legal action against AEG.
My point is this: If AEG did nothing wrong, unethical or out of the ordinary, why bar Katherine Jackson from seeing the original contract and from seeing Michael's signature on that contract?
I cannot comment on Leonard Rowe's book as I have not read it. I have bookmarked a certain site so that I may purchase it when I am ready, but until then, I will not comment on it.
My personal belief at this time is that Mr. Rowe is correct about Michael having agreed to do 10 concerts originally, as I have a source whom I trust that mentioned that to me personally. (I work in the industry as a costumer, and the costume house where I work made some of the costumes for "This Is It.") I also believe that Mr. Rowe will have his own personal point of view, his own personal (and human) bias, and his own agenda(s) to promote, as does every other person who has written about Michael Jackson. And that includes Michael Jackson himself. ( I type that with L.O.V.E., so please don't be offended. Put yourself in Michael's position, and you'll understand where I'm coming from. )
In searching for the truth on a person or a topic, one must research and read and look over many sources of information. There will be truth in Rowe's book, but there will also be questionable items and topics which would need to be 'cross examined' by other witnesses to those events and discussions. When it comes to Michael Jackson and searching for the truth and for answers, I personally cannot take any one person's version of the truth as gospel.
Even Michael himself had his own version of the truth, and as Berry Gordy mentioned, you have to "read between the lines."
Hi Carmen, That is my question as well, and what felt like a form of blackmail to me,in addition. It is completely obvious that they have something to hide, as you said. It makes me wonder if perhaps they are getting scared. Frightened people sometimes act irrationally without thinking things through. How could they not know that an act such as that is as good as a full admission of guilt?! Very strange indeed...
If AEG has any fears, they also have enough well paid and powerful lawyers, not to mention some 'friends' much higher up, I suspect, that it's going to be a long time and a long hard fight before that company is forced to admit any wrong doing or to accept any responsibility whatsoever regarding Michael Jackson.
Forcing Katherine Jackson to sign a non-disclosure agreement or confidentiality agreement would be labeled "standard procedure" by AEG and their lawyers, I'm sure. It would not be considered an admission of guilt to the general public, necessarily, but it would be seen as such to Michael Jackson fans and supporters.
You'll find the article I linked to is dated from July 2009, I believe.
Last Edited by on Sep 18, 2010 9:50 PM
I felt to post this link to Michael´s song "Unbreakable" on Myvideo. It is a wonderful video and keeps its message. And it shows Michael in full action. Let us follow his example. This song has been playing in my mind since four days and on my player.
Sorry, I am so short with my time at the moment. But one thing I want to say. Thank you all who stand up for Michael and speak out for him - each single one in their field and manner. And good to hear that one company involved in Michael´s murder speaks out to all of us that they know and feel our force - and this is around the world!!
COME TOGETHER!! WE ARE FORCE!! WE ARE U N B R E A K A B L E !!!
I am sure Michael is thankful for so much support and L.O.V.E. And this does not only support him.... .
Sunflower - great you did -thanks for your information and thanks to all of you here on the board. I will send all of my heart with all of you whatever you do for Michael focussing on the best success and outcome. All you expressed in your posts I fel too.
With lots of L.O.V.E Ute
Last Edited by on Sep 20, 2010 2:48 PM
I totally agree that Michael was responsible for himself - both in health and in career/business but also that those around him bear some responsibility for the direction Michael's life ultimately took...as Carmen mentioned there is plenty of blame to go around.
But Michael was in a Catch-22 situation...the greater his success - the greater the wealth - the more he was unable to trust those around him as his inner circle grew and changed. It must have gotten harder and harder to tell who did and didn't have an agenda when it came to him.
On the flipside - he *had* to trust and rely on people to some degree. What choice did he have? Legal - financial - business - career - the list goes on.
No person could handle what Michael had on his plate without putting a certain amount of trust in people to do the right thing. There is a leap of faith I believe he had to take in order to maintain everything he had. I often wonder what would have happened if he just fired everybody and started over from scratch...probably would have grown to be the same game with different players - but still I wonder if it could have made a difference had he taken back more control of what went on...took more of a hands-on approach.
I hope this makes sense :) Guess what I'm trying to say is that even though Michael couldn't really trust anyone, he had to take that leap of faith with people because he couldn't handle it all himself - I don't believe any of us could if we were in his shoes...
I would really like your take on what I deducted from Murray's outcry concerning Kline? I'm not a lawyer, but that hole emotional request from Murray concerning Kline being added to Joe's lawsuit is fishy to me. Please read the second half of my post above (Sept. 16, 7:40).
How very true your observations are! The greater the success, the money, the fame, the public adoration, etc, the greater the attraction of people with less than honorable intentions and their own agendas. I don't know if it would have been possible for Michael to find many honest, decent people to work with him, work for him and help him on personal and professional levels. I think this is true for many, if not most, actors and singers - and other types of talented Artists in the entertainment industry - that great fame and wealth does not automatically make one's life easier, prettier, better or more convenient. Looking at this from a general perspective, and combining my point of view with the fact that we're talking about the entertainment industry, where many shady people and powerful players work and function, it's a given that someone like Michael Jackson would hit major road blocks and pavement upheavals along the way.
I think I recall reading that Michael did fire people and did replace them repeatedly, whereby he kept himself surrounded by fairly new and fresh faces and maintained some degree of control that way. I think this may have applied to his later years. I also recall reading that he learned to keep business relationships and personal relationships separate.
Yes, BlueDestiny, I think Michael had to trust people at times without necessarily knowing if he could, and just had to wait and see how his trust was treated and how things panned out. His father, Joe, would have been able to "sniff" people out and would have known what to look for in the people surrounding Michael, but Michael had to separate himself from his father and find his own path in life and in the music industry.
I had a friend years ago who worked in the music industry as an Artist Manager. She would definitely have some strong opinions on what happened to Michael, on the types of people who may have surrounded him, and the deceit and manipulations that were probably taking place in his life over the years by people in his inner circle and those watching him. My personal comments on what Michael could have done, should have done, might have done, etc., are useless and don't really matter because I don't work in that industry and cannot provide intelligent and objective analysis regarding Michael's circumstances without having facts and a much larger knowledge base of how that industry works. I do know some things based on what my one-time friend told me. That information tells me that Michael was in a tough situation, and had been for many, many years I suspect. That industry is run by EXTREMELY POWERFUL PEOPLE WHO WILL STOP AT NOTHING.
Michael did have some good people working with him and helping him: Quincy Jones, David LeGrand, Tom Messereau, Bruce Swedien, and perhaps a few others. The names I've mentioned were either well known in the music industry or were his attorneys who did their job well. Peter Lopez may have been another good person in Michael's life. I find myself wondering why Michael fired Lopez, or if Michael was pressured to fire him. My general intuition is telling me that in the music industry, the slime balls will push out and destroy, or somehow eliminate, the decent folks. It's a seedy business. There's no way of getting around this fact, I'm afraid.
Sorry for another essay. It's just that when I write, I have to get it all out and say what I need to say. It would be very interesting to listen to and watch a discussion panel of music industry experts and long-time members talk about Michael's life in the industry, what he may have been put through, what some of his experiences may have been, and what he probably encountered on the business end of things.
Last Edited by on Sep 19, 2010 10:30 AM
"I also think that Murray wanting to include Kline is more of a legal move than an emotional outcry for justice, as Murray will have a better chance of clearing himself if Kline is involved in the misuse of drugs, and in the misconduct end of the trial. Murray including Kline will also put another face out there to take the heat and take some of the pressure off of him."
I didn't respond to this segment of your post, Marleneho, because I never thought of Murray's demand that Kline be included in the lawsuit(s) was an "emotional outcry for justice." I recall reading some news links online about Murray wanting Kline included in Joe's lawsuit, but my impression was that it had absolutely NOTHING to do with seeking true justice for Michael. It had ONLY to do with not taking the responsibility for Michael's death alone. Murray knew other doctors had been working with Michael, prescribing medications, performing various cosmetic procedures over the years, etc., so he naturally wants to make certain that he doesn't go down alone. If I look at this from Murray's point of view, I would do the same thing! The positive aspect to Murray's actions is that it's shedding light on something we already knew and/or suspected - that there are others involved.
Carmen - I'm glad for your 'essays' - always very insightful!
I just read the entire PDF that Bonnie posted. I hesitated at first but my thirst to read something that is not tabloid-tainted won out...and so I read it.
I wept - and it left me with more questions than I had before. It made me angry...and in some ways I must say it made me angry at Michael! Perhaps an unreasonable response to an unreasonable situation but....I can't help it.
Don't get me wrong - I felt other emotions also as I read it but overall I am just so angry at what happened - how it happened - why it happened - just so want-to-throw-something angry. (No, I didn't break anything :)
Never let anyone have so much control of your life that you are no longer free to make your own decisions. It seems to me it was a gradual thing and that Michael was misled - repeatedly - from the onset. By the time he was in too deep - it was too late...
Here comes that wanna-throw-something feeling again though I'm sure many of you can relate to that feeling...
I just finished reading the document and if all that it alleges is true than the picture becomes very clear.
AEG had all they needed from Michael once he put up the ATV Catalog as collateral.
They basically played Russian Roulette with Michael's well-being by delaying the equipment for Murray.
One also gets a real sense of the inner workings of the industry and how it treats some of its artists. If they can treat Michael Jackson in such a callous and inhumane way just imagine artists of lower caliber.
Edited to add: Just want to say that it all sounded so awful and so cruel that I could not help but cry while reading it all. It all underlined that they had no regard for Michael as a human being
Last Edited by on Sep 19, 2010 10:14 PM
Hello Bonnie It is kind of sad. None of this is going to bring Michael back. Will justice be served? Should someone have paid more attention to Michael on a personal level? Does Michael now feel that he should have let someone in to help him along the way? So many questions and for some reason they all remain unanswered.Wish there was someway we could all communicate with him. Hope he is doing well though on the other side and will help his mother seek justice for him.
I'm hoping that when these liars die, it will be rather like the scene in "Ghost" when the darkness comes up and grabs the guy that killed Sam after he got hit by the car. KARMA baby! I'm angry really angry. How is it that the truth has been hidden and manipulated by these same people? What about scruples? What about honesty? It's disgusting. I most likely do not understand how hard and dangerous it must be to lobby for the truth to come out. You guys are my heros. It's so huge, and incideous. Time to listen to a little of Mr. Jackson. "The love is in the music."
Thank you so much, Bonnie, for the link to the actual court documents of Katherine's law suit against AEG and the other parties mentioned. I just finished reading all of it and found it very interesting. I didn't cry or get emotional, but I did find myself taking some mental notes. This was very useful to me for piecing some things together and cross referencing some things.
Bonnie, thanks for the update and the link. Even though Michael is gone and the pain persists I hope he gets justice. He deserves it. We all love Michael not only for his music and the entertainment he brought to this world but for the kindness, peace and tranquility that he held in his heart. Only those of us who are like MJ will feel the love. Thanks Bonnie
My biggest wish in this case is that the truth continues to STEADILY and PERSISTENTLY bubble to the surface; and for this group of corrupt people to start to get an inkling that they went too far "this time"; and that THEY WILL NOT GET AWAY WITH THIS IMMORAL DISREGARD FOR HUMAN LIFE IN THE NAME OF GREED and will be held accountable.
I've watched the video & am confused on one point... it's clear that AEG did hire Murray, but wasn't he hired upon Michael's specific request? Did I miss something in the video? Did Michael clarify on this to you, Bonnie?
Court To Hear Joe Jackson’s Estate Appeal October 6, 2010 7:28 AM
Joe Jackson leaves the Los Angeles Superior Court after doctor Conrad Murray’s second court appearance on an involuntary manslaughter charge relating to the death of Michael Jackson, in downtown Los Angeles on April 5, 2010. (credit: MARK RALSTON/AFP/Getty Images)
From iesalem LOS ANGELES (AP) — An appeals court will hear arguments Wednesday on whether Michael Jackson’s father should be allowed to challenge the administrators of his son’s already lucrative estate.
Joe Jackson has appealed a probate court’s dismissal of his objections to the appointment of attorney John Branca and music executive and family friend John McClain to oversee the pop singer’s estate.
A judge ruled in November that the elder Jackson did not have standing to intervene in the case and was not entitled to an evidentiary hearing to contest the administrators.
Such a hearing would allow Joe Jackson’s attorney, Brian Oxman, to air complaints about potential conflicts of interest and the validity of the pop singer’s 2002 will, which specifically omitted his father from receiving any money.
Attorneys for Michael Jackson’s estate have noted the probate court’s findings against the elder Jackson, and said in motions to the appeals court that the ruling came after considering Oxman’s arguments in the most favorable light.
Oxman was also allowed to argue at length during the November hearing, the estate also said in its filings.
The attorney raised issues on behalf of Joe Jackson after the singer’s mother, Katherine, dropped any of her potential objections to the appointment of Branca and McClain. Katherine Jackson and her son’s three children are the primary beneficiaries of the singer’s estate, which has earned tens of millions since his death at age 50 in June 2009.
The estate also noted that Joe Jackson sought a stipend, but later chose to withdraw that request. The Jackson family patriarch has filed a wrongful death lawsuit in federal court against Conrad Murray, the doctor charged in connection with his son’s death.
Murray’s lawyers have asked a judge to dismiss that case, arguing in part that Joe Jackson doesn’t have the right to sue for wrongful death.
This is all very interesting and somewhat confusing. In late 2009, I remember reading that Katherine Jackson was unable to contest the will at the risk of forfeiture of her benefits. On the other hand, according to the article above and others that I've read, the lawyers arguing on behalf of the estate (as well as for Conrad Murray?) claim that Joe Jackson cannot challenge the estate administrators or contest the will because he "is not" a beneficiary. So basically, according to the attorneys for the estate, no one can contest the will or challenge the assignment of the estate administrators. Am I missing something, or is that the gist of it?
From what I have observed after reading some articles online, both Leonard Rowe and Brian Oxman have issued documentation or statements with some form of proof to establish that Katherine Jackson was indeed supporting Joe Jackson, although it may have been via indirect means. I believe this was a necessary legal maneuver to establish that Joe Jackson was - indirectly - being supported by Michael Jackson, even though Michael did not specifically include Joe in his alleged 2002 Will.
Now, after establishing Joe's financial dependency on Michael, they will attempt to open a legal door for Joe to contest the 2002 Will and its validity.
On a personal side note, I do find it odd that the probate court judge ruled so quickly to accept the validity of the 2002 Will, and that he didn't bother to question that there might be a newer and more recent Will. Then again, he probably felt that time was of the essence and felt pressure to move things along quickly. (Or, he may have been one of the over 400 Los Angeles County judges who takes bribes, as per Richard Fine's statements, findings and research. Please note that I am not stating this theory as fact, but merely as speculation, since it has crossed my mind over the past couple of days.)
Gem, I'm under the impression that the 2002 Will was worded in such a way as to make it clear that for a beneficiary to contest the will or to challenge the executors of the Will would make that beneficiary lose all rights, monetary gifts, etc. In other words, I think you basically got "the gist of it."
Last Edited by on Oct 06, 2010 7:19 PM
Michael Jackson's "Petition for Probate" filed in California
"A big deal has been made in the media that Michael Jackson put his mother in as a beneficiary but omitted his father. This is silly. Katherine and Joseph Jackson have been married for over 60 years. Joe Jackson does not technically have a right to his wife’s inheritance. However, in reality, they are a long time married couple who presumably share everything. Giving to his mother is not really leaving his father out in the cold."
NOW ANOTHER EXCERPT FROM THE ABOVE POST CONCERNING "PETITION FOR PROBATE":
"The “Petition for Probate” in the Michael Jackson estate, which in Florida would be called “Petition for Administration” was filed in California today, along with his will. This is a petition filed with the court, requesting that the probate of his estate be opened.
It lists John Branca, John McClain and Barry Siegel as both Co-Executors of Michael Jackson’s estate and successor co-Trustees of the Michael Jackson Family Trust. So that answers one question as to the identity of the Trustees. As co-executors of the estate and co-trustees of the trust, they will be able to more easily manage the transfer of the assets not already in the trust to the trust. Not to mention that there are fees that they can be paid for serving as both co-executor and co-trustees. While these fees are not normally that large, in an estate of this magnitude and complexity they could certainly go into the millions of dollars."
NOW ADDITIONAL BLOG COMMENTARY CONCERNING LIVING TRUST:
An In Depth Review of Michael Jackson's Trust - Part 1
"Many people do not know what a Revocable Living Trust is, or how they work. The purpose of a Revocable Living Trust (which I'll refer to as an "RLT") is to avoid probate when you die, and to avoid a Guardianship if you become incapacitated. That's it. An RLT does not protect you from creditors. It does not save you taxes. It does not do many of the things that non-attorney Trust mills and hucksters claim that it does. But used correctly, and, if you need one, it can be a powerful tool that is an essential part of estate planning. In brief, a person will transfer ownership and title of their assets while they are alive to their RLT. Then, upon their death, and if the RLT was properly funded, the RLT will be the owner of the assets and not the individual. Because the Trust owned the property and not the individual, there is nothing to probate (again, if the RLT is properly funded).
Article One of Michael Jackson's RLT (which I will refer to as the Trust) sets forth some basic information about the Trust -- i.e., it's name, when it was established, that Michael Jackson has the power to amend or revoke it at any time, that Michael Jackson has the power to add or remove property from it at any time, and other general principles. Michael Jackson is the creator (often referred to as the "Settlor," "Grantor," or in this document, "Trustor"), and he is also the Trustee. That means that while he was alive and able to make his own decisions, he was the only person in control of the Trust."
KIPLINGER'S ARTICLE SITED IN THE BLOG CONCERNING THE SAME:
Learn from the pop icon’s concise plans for handling his assets and caring for his family.
By Jane Bennett Clark, Senior Associate Editor, Kiplinger's Personal Finance July 2009
"Consider a living trust. Along with a will, Jackson established a living trust, also called a revocable trust. This estate-planning tool lets you transfer all your property, including cars, bank accounts and real estate, into a separately owned entity—in Jackson’s case, the Michael Jackson Family Trust--while maintaining control as trustee. At your death, control transfers to your designated co-trustee or successor trustee. Most people, including Jackson, set up their will to “pour over” so that whatever property remains outside the trust at their death eventually is added to it.
The beauty of a living trust for some is that the assets it holds at the time of death avoid probate, a public process."
People who are not interested in having the media know how much they died with or to whom the money is going to be left always do a living trust to prevent media attention,” says Reinstein. Avoiding probate can also make sense for regular folks with significant assets or property in more than one state because it spares their heirs the aggravation of a prolonged legal process. “It saves a lot of money, time and hassle,” says David Shulman, an estate-planning attorney in Fort Lauderdale, Fla."
HERE IS A COMMENT I LOCATED CONCERNING CALIFORNIA WILL FILING PROCEDURE:
Are Wills and Trust filed in California? If so, where can I obtain a copy?
"In California, after a person's death a will is supposed to be "lodged" with the probate court in the county where the decedent resided. You can write to that court and request a copy of the will (enclose a self addressed, stamped envelope and a check made payable to the XXX County Probate Court Clerk with the amount left blank). Or you can go down to the courthouse and examine the original yourself. In most California counties, you can check online to see if the will has been lodged (go to the county's website and follow the instructions to find the probate records).
Trusts aren't filed anywhere unless there is a contest of some sort...
The judge in the wrongful death lawsuit Joe Jacksonfiled against Dr. Conrad Murray lashed out at both sides ... saying they both screwed up.
Judge John Walter denied Dr. Murray's motion to dismiss the case, concluding Murray's lawyer, Charles Peckham, violated court rules by not trying to resolve the issues with Joe's attorney before filing his motion.
But the judge also said Joe's lawyer, Brian Oxman, was slow on the uptake in filing his opposition papers ... missing the deadline.
But the judge's ruling isn't permanent. Murray's lawyer is allowed to refile. We're told Peckham will call Oxman -- who almost certainly will tell Peckham to go screw himself -- and then Peckham can refile his motion to get the case thrown out.
This is actually from the Today Show web site: http://scoop.todayshow.com/_news/2010/10/25/5346899-katherine-jackson-hasnt-received-a-penny-from-michaels-estate
Katherine Jackson hasn't received 'a penny' from Michael's estate
Another chapter in the Jackson family feud is about to begin. On Monday, several Jackson family members are expected to appear in court for matters related to Dr. Conrad Murray, but other family members, specifically Rebbie and Randy, are expected to issue a statement in an attempt to distance themselves from a concert being billed as a tribute to Michael Jackson. Meanwhile, Katherine Jackson claims she hasn't received "a penny" from Michael's estate. The concert, deemed a "money grab" by a Jackson family confidant, is being produced by The Jackson Family Foundation, which lists Joseph Jackson as chairman and Katherine Jackson as vice chairman. A draft of Rebbie and Randy's statement, obtained by Scoop, reads in part: "It has been bought to my attention that The Jackson Family Foundation is staging a "Legacy of the Legend" concert Nov. 13 in Atlanta. That show is being billed as a tribute to my brother, Michael Jackson. Reportedly, I and others are scheduled to perform at this concert ... I am in no way associated with this event or the foundation and I wish to make that clear because I do not want to be party to anything that could potentially pose legal or other problems now or in the future." Why stage such a thing? Katherine and Joe need the money, according to the family friend. "Katherine told Oprah that she hasn't received a penny from the estate since Michael died," said the source. "What they (lawyers for the estate) have told her is that they have been busy trying to retire some of Michael's massive debt and they have maintained bills at Hayvenhurst and the kids' school." The source said that Janet Jackson has been helping Katherine financially in the mean time.
It is incredible and not at the same time what is still going on since Michael´s murder.
I only wish that the Jackson Family will somehow overcome their disagreements and arguments and go for ONE AIM on behalf of Justice for Michael and the Well-Being of his Children.
ALL GOOD ENERGY MUST BE COMPILED AND RAISED TO BREAK THROUGH!!
But not to reach this is intended by the estate - say Branca and Co. Also if the family is splitted - wonderful... they think.... To cause arguments and separation, isolation is part of their agenda.
Poor guys, the day of taking YOUR RESPONSIBILITY in having been part of murdering Michael as well as in attempting to starve out his family and children financially - will come and you wish you would have decided differently. Remember this is a law of nature not mine.
SO LET US FOCUS ON THE WHOLE TRUTH TO COME OUT AND SUPPORT MICHAEL, HIS CHILDREN AND FAMILY MENTALLY AND WITH ALL THE LOVE WE CAN GIVE - SO THAT THE WHOLE TRUTH WILL COME OUT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. AND LET US GO ON PLEASE WITH OUR WORK TO SUPPORT THIS PROCESS - WHATEVER WORK WE DO... . EVERYTHING, EACH SINGLE STEP WE TAKE AHEAD TOWARDS THIS AIM IS SO VALUABLE!
THANK YOU ALL. Ute
Last Edited by on Oct 25, 2010 2:40 PM
If it is true, how sickening is it that they have not paid anything to Katherine?
And why is the family split up into different camps? How are they going to help Michael if they are so fragmented...?
I have originally posted this in the Mottola/ Sony thread and am reposting it here:
Michael Jackson Settles $48M Lawsuit Monday, June 18, 2007
"The most important thing is that Michael Jackson's publishing catalog remains safe and sound," said Jackson's lawyer, L. Londell McMillan, whose clients have included Prince and Stevie Wonder.
The settlement, McMillan added, "presents a win-win for everybody."
...The lawsuit was one of a number of recent suits involving Jackson and former business associates. In a deposition taken for the New York case in Paris last summer, Jackson said that the entertainment industry was "full of sharks, charlatans and impostors."
The entertainment world, he said, is "full of thieves and crooks. That's not new. Everybody knows that."
Last Edited by on Oct 26, 2010 10:50 AM
10/26/2010 12:20 PM PDT by TMZ Staff Joe Jackson's days of meddling in his son's finances are officially over -- the California Court of Appeal has ruled that Joe has no right to intervene in Michael Jackson's estate.
Joe had been fighting to have a say in how MJ's estate is administered -- despite the fact that he was excluded from the will Michael signed in 2002.
But today, a panel of judges reinforced the decision the probate court made back in November -- that Joe lacked the proper standing.